| 中文版 English

具体要求

其它要求

-
关闭
An exceptionally rare and important sacrificial-red-glazed bowl, Mark and period of Xuande | 明宣德 祭紅釉盌 《大明宣德年製》款
美国 北京时间
2023年03月21日 开拍 / 2023年03月19日 截止委托
拍品描述 翻译
Lot Details Description An exceptionally rare and important sacrificial-red-glazed bowl Mark and period of Xuande 明宣德 祭紅釉盌 《大明宣德年製》款 the base with a six-character mark in underglaze blue within a double circle,?together with a Sotheby's Hong Kong catalogue of the T.Y Chao Private and Family Trust Collections of Important Chinese Ceramics and Jade Carvings: Part II, 19th May 1987 (2)? 及 香港蘇富比趙從衍收藏專拍圖錄《T.Y Chao Private and Family Trust Collections of Important Chinese Ceramics and Jade Carvings: Part II》,1987年5月19日 Diameter 4 in., 10.1 cm? Condition report For more information on and additional videos for this lot, please contact?serina.wei@sothebys.com In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective qualified opinion. NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING CONDITION OF A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD "AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SALE PRINTED IN THE CATALOGUE. Provenance Collection of T.Y. Chao (1912-1999). Sotheby's Hong Kong, 19th May 1987, lot 250. J.J. Lally & Co., New York. 趙從衍 (1912-1999) 收藏 香港蘇富比1987年5月19日,編號250 藍理捷,紐約 Exhibited Ming and Ch'ing Porcelain from the Collection of the T.Y. Chao Family Foundation, Hong Kong Museum of Art, Hong Kong, 1978, cat. no. 41.? 《趙從衍家族基金會珍藏明清瓷器展覽圖錄》,香港藝術館,香港,1978年,編號41 Catalogue note The Ultimate Glaze Color Regina Krahl No porcelain glaze has probably been more admired ever than the lush rich red of the early Ming dynasty (1368-1644), whose intensity and brilliance have been likened to rubies and whose satisfactory texture has evoked comparisons with crushed strawberries. "The copper-red monochrome glaze still stands as one of Ching-te-chen's [Jingdezhen's] greatest technical and aesthetic achievements …" (Rose Kerr and Nigel Wood,?Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 5:?Chemistry and Chemical Technology, part XII:?Ceramic Technology, Cambridge, 2004, p. 563). This red was undoubtedly a triumph of China's potters. It has always been exceedingly rare. The potters at the Ming imperial kilns achieved this triumph for only a couple of decades at the absolute peak of the kilns' development in the Yongle (1403-24) and Xuande (1426-35) periods, a time unmatched in the proficiency of its ceramic craftsmen. Even in this period, vessels of this color demanded the tribute of large quantities of failures. The amounts of red-glazed rejects discarded and buried at the Jingdezhen kilns in Jiangxi and the scarcity of monochrome copper-red porcelains handed down from this early Ming period attest to the challenge their production represented (for red sherd heaps see?Jingdezhen chutu Mingdai yuyao ciqi?[Porcelains from the Ming imperial kilns excavated at Jingdezhen], Beijing, 2009, p. 14, fig. 10) (fig. 1). Unlike iron, also used as a glaze pigment but naturally occurring in ceramic materials, copper has to be deliberately added to the glaze to color it. It requires only minimal amounts, but it is a highly fugitive component that tends to vaporize in the firing, which makes the production of a strong, even color extremely difficult. Copper-green glazes, developing in an oxidizing kiln atmosphere, had already been used in China for over a millennium. A few exceptional cases are even known, where such copper-pigmented glazes turned red, most likely by accident, when an oxygen-reducing atmosphere occurred in the kiln (a fragment of one tiny red-glazed vessel from the Changsha kilns in Hunan was recovered, for example, from the 9th-century Belitung shipwreck). Monochrome red glazes were deliberately created only at Jingdezhen in the late Yuan dynasty (1279-1368). The examples of this and the subsequent Hongwu period (1368-98), the first Ming reign, however, tend to be opaque, much less brilliant and often uneven in color and are lacking the distinctive white rim, that so strikingly emphasizes the red on the present bowl. In the Yongle period the potters managed to revolutionize this red glaze color, according to Kerr and Wood through improvements of the basic glaze recipe, a change of the copper oxide employed and a reduction of the amount of copper added (Kerr & Wood,?op. cit., p. 564). The proportion of red-glazed sherds compared to white ones increased dramatically in the late Yongle period, suggesting an increased interest in producing this fabulous color. The already excellent results of this period were further improved in the Xuande reign. Xuande red vessels have thicker bodies and glazes than Yongle ones and differ in their glaze quality. They may have been fired separate from other Xuande wares, in a smaller kiln, so as to allow for slight over-firing of the porcelain (Nigel Wood,?Chinese Glazes. Their Origins, Chemistry and Recreation, London, 1999, p. 179). According to Liu Xinyuan, chief archaeologist at Jingdezhen excavating the early Ming site, "the Xuande red glaze neither runs nor develops crackles. It is almost twice as thick as its predecessor in the Yongle period, is less glossy but much warmer and more unctuous in feeling … It was Xuande, rather than Yongle, red monochrome that was being emulated in the Wanli, Kangxi, Yongzheng and Qianlong periods [i.e. 16th to 18th centuries]" (Imperial Porcelain of the Yongle and Xuande Periods Excavated from the Site of the Ming Imperial Factory at Jingdezhen, Hong Kong Museum of Art, Hong Kong, 1989, p. 79). Geng Baochang of the Palace Museum, Beijing, also states that compared to the Yongle 'fresh red' (xian hong) the red glaze of the Xuande period was improved and lists a whole range of fancy names used to describe it, such as 'ruby red' (baoshi hong), 'piled-up red' (ji hong), 'clear red' (ji hong), 'intoxicated red' (zui hong), 'majestic red' (da hong), 'chicken-blood red' (jixie hong), 'ox-blood red' (niuxie hong) , 'and sacrificial red' (ji hong) (Ming Qing ciqi jianding?[Appraisal of Ming and Qing porcelain], Hong Kong, 1993, p. 64). Since the Hongwu period, porcelain was used at court for sacrificial vessels. It is possible that the choice of porcelain was due to the fact that–unlike with metal–different colors could be produced in this medium, and this may in turn have encouraged the development of further glaze colors. The often-used term 'sacrificial red' suggests usage in a ritual context, as red was in China traditionally employed for sacrifices to the Altar of the Sun. Liu Xinyuan, however, states that in the Xuande period no strict difference was yet made at court between vessels destined for sacrificial purposes and those used in daily life for eating and drinking (Jingdezhen chutu Ming Xuande guanyao ciqi / Xuande Imperial Porcelain Excavated at Jingdezhen, Chang Foundation, Taipei, 1998, pp 160-61). The Hongwu Emperor himself is recorded to have quoted this phrase of Confucius: "they served the dead as they would have served the living; they served the departed as they would have served those still present", suggesting at least in ancestral ceremonies usage of the same vessels as in daily life (Shih Ching-fei, 'The New Idea of Ritual Vessels in the Early Ming Dynasty: A Third System?', Craig Clunas, Jessica Harrison-Hall and Luk Yu-ping, eds,?Ming China. Courts and Contacts, 1400-1450, London, 2017, p. 113). The specific use of red porcelain for the Altar of the Sun seems to be firmly documented only from the Jiajing reign (1522-66) onwards. At the Xuande court, the present bowl may equally have been employed at the altar or at the table. The National Palace Museum, Taipei, owns at least two Xuande copper-red bowls of similar form and size, one of which has been published by the Museum as a tea bowl (cha zhong?茶鐘). This bowl was later matched by the Qianlong Emperor (r. 1736-95) with a Neolithic jade disc as saucer, the jade having been incised with a poem by the Emperor and the date Qianlong 34 (1769), see?Ye keyi qing xin – cha qi, cha shi, cha hua/Empty Vessels, Replenished Minds: The Culture, Practice, and Art of Tea, National Palace Museum, Taipei, 2002, no. 42, and https://theme.npm.edu.tw/opendata/DigitImageSets.aspx?sNo=04015434 (fig. 2). Red bowls of similar size and proportions as the present piece were fired already in the Yongle period, but unsuccessfully. The difficulty to achieve satisfactory results is graphically illustrated by a completely failed specimen, without reign mark, from the late Yongle reign, included in the Hong Kong Museum of Art exhibition, 1989,?op. cit., cat. no. 31 (fig. 3); a mottled red glaze, equally rejected, can be seen on another Yongle specimen, see?Ming Qing yuyao ciqi. Gugong Bowuyuan yu Jingdezhen taoci kaogu xin chengguo/The?Porcelain of Imperial Kiln in Ming and Qing Dynasties. The New Achievements on Ceramic Archaeology of the Palace Museum and Jingdezhen, Beijing, 2016, no. 108. Only in the Xuande period were such red-glazed bowls inscribed with the imperial reign mark, but the present bowl is exceptional in being inscribed with a mark in underglaze blue. The few companion pieces of this form and size are all inscribed rather indistinctly with incised Xuande marks. Two such bowls in the National Palace Museum are listed in?Gugong ciqi lu?[Record of porcelains from the Old Palace], Taipei, 1961-6, vol. 2, part 1, p. 44, and two have been published, respectively, in the Museum's exhibitions?Ming Xuande ciqi tezhan?[Special exhibition of Ming Xuande porcelain], Taipei, 1980, cat. no. 91 (fig. 4); and?Mingdai Xuande guanyao jinghua tezhan tulu / Catalogue of the Special Exhibition of Selected Hsüan-te Imperial Porcelains of the Ming Dynasty, Taipei, 1998, no. 119, the latter being the bowl with the Neolithic jade 'saucer' referred to above. Two different red-glazed bowls of this size, also with incised Xuande reign marks, were sent by the Chinese Government to the?International Exhibition of Chinese Art, Royal Academy of Arts, London, 1935-36, cat. nos 1618 and 1620 and are illustrated in the accompanying publication?Canjia Lundun Zhongguo yishu guoji zhanlanhui chupin tushuo / Illustrated Catalogue of Chinese Government Exhibits for the International Exhibition of Chinese Art in London, Shanghai, 1936, vol. 2, nos 140 and 141. The present whereabouts of these two bowls are not known. The fact that the handed-down pieces are all of exceptional quality reflects the rigorous quality control at the time. A discarded red bowl of this form and size, slightly distorted, also with an incised Xuande reign mark, recovered from the waste heaps of the Ming imperial kiln site at Zhushan, Jingdezhen, was included in the exhibition?Jingdezhen chutu Ming Xuande guanyao ciqi / Xuande Imperial Porcelain excavated at Jingdezhen, Chang Foundation, Taipei, 1998, cat. no. 113-4, together with two larger bowls with uneven red glaze, one with incised and the other with underglaze-blue reign mark, cat. nos 113-2 and 113-3; a very pale, mottled red Xuande bowl from the waste heaps, shaped like the present piece, but with incised mark and white inside, is illustrated in?Jingdezhen chutu Mingdai yuyao ciqi,?op. cit., p. 110, no. 048. Due to the high failure rate, the cost of successful examples sent to the palace must have been excessive and the technique was practically abandoned after the Xuande reign and not revived until two and a half centuries later, in the late 17th century. The Kangxi Emperor (r. 1662-1722) supported attempts to revive the lost technique. Kangxi potters managed indeed to recreate the intensity of the red color, but not the rich quality and the opulent depth of the early Ming glaze. Geng states (op. cit., p. 64) that the white rim, which occurs naturally on Xuande pieces as the red pigment drains from the lip, was deliberately copied on Kangxi versions by adding white glaze. In the paintings of?Twelve Beauties at Leisure, executed for Prince Yinzhen, the future Yongzheng Emperor (r. 1723-35), one of the ladies is elegantly holding a similar red cup in one hand, but one with a mottled red glaze which clearly represents a contemporary vessel of the Kangxi period. The lady obviously uses it for tea since a tea pot is standing nearby, see?China. The Three Emperors 1662-1795, Royal Academy of Arts, London, 2005, no. 173, p. 258 bottom right. The?Guwan tu?(Pictures of Ancient Playthings) of 1728 in the Sir Percival David Collection in the British Museum, which appears to illustrate pieces in the imperial collection during the Yongzheng Emperor's reign, depicts what can only be an early Ming bowl of this type. The bowl is likely to be of similar size as the present piece, judging by the difference in size between it and a red-glazed dish shown nearby. It is presented on a carved wooden stand, which suggests that it had been chosen for display in the palace; see?ibid., no. 168, p. 252 (fig. 5). The known difficulty to achieve this glorious and exceptional red color and the mystery shrouding successful firings, surrounded copper-red vessels with a mystique that gave rise to various myths, such as that rubies were used in the glaze (Kerr and Wood,?op. cit., p. 565), or, more dramatically, that the intense blood red could only be achieved after a potter – in another version the daughter of a potter – jumped into the kiln themselves. 寶色宣紅 康蕊君 明初紅釉器濃綺艷麗,色如紅寶,晶瑩欲滴,釉料鋪滿瓷胎,上手能感覺到細膩的橘皮凹凸感。「單色銅紅釉仍是景德鎮工藝及美學成就之一」(柯玫瑰及武德,《中國科學技術史?第五卷:化學及相關技術?第十二分冊:陶瓷科技》,劍橋,2004年,頁563)。由此可見,紅釉的發明和發展無疑是中國製瓷業的一大建樹。 紅釉美器歷來珍稀難得。明代御窰官瓷經過數十載多番改良,及至永宣二朝始臻於爐火純青,後世成品終略遜一籌。即使是永樂、宣德年間,要燒出如斯上乘的紅釉器仍需不斷嘗試。江西景德鎮御窰遺址出土過大量殘器破片,然而現存的明初單色銅紅釉器依然極為罕有,從此判斷,燒造佳器誠非易事(永宣朝紅釉瓷殘片堆圖例可見《景德鎮出土明代御窰瓷器》,北京,2009年,頁14,圖10)(圖1)。 包含鐵質成分的釉藥稱為鐵釉,而鐵元素亦可於燒製陶瓷的天然土石原料中找到;銅則有所不同,工匠須特意在釉藥中加入銅作為呈色劑,方可製成色釉。銅的用量極少,但銅料嬌火,容易在窰燒高溫下揮發,因此發色濃艷均勻的銅紅釉器尤其難得。含氧化銅的釉藥入窰後,在氧化氣氛中可燒成呈綠色的銅綠釉,這項技術在中國應用已逾千年。當含銅釉藥處於缺氧的還原氣氛,則會燒成紅色的銅紅釉,推測是在燒製銅綠釉時偶然發現,早期例子可見九世紀勿里洞沉船遺骸的湖南長沙窰紅釉瓷殘片。景德鎮在元末已嘗試燒造單色紅釉器,然此時及洪武一朝的釉色皆較為暗啞不均,口沿缺乏白色的燈草邊。相比之下,本品殷妍亮麗,白邊清晰可辨。 根據柯玫瑰和武德考證,永樂年間的工匠藉由改變釉料的氧化銅成分以及減低銅含量,從而使配方更加優良(柯玫瑰及武德,前述出處,頁564)。直至永樂後期,相較起白瓷,紅釉瓷殘片所佔比例大幅增加,可見時人比以往更常燒製紅釉器。 紅釉器在宣德朝經進一步改良,胎體和釉料較永樂朝更厚,釉料品質亦有所提升。燒造紅釉器的窰爐或有別於燒造其他宣德瓷器的窰爐,規模亦較小,容易達到高溫(武德,《Chinese Glazes. Their Origins, Chemistry and Recreation》,倫敦,1999年,頁179)。景德鎮陶瓷考古研究所所長劉新園寫道:「永樂鮮紅器釉層較薄、色澤光亮,大概宣德帝更希望紅釉有凝重、溫潤的玉質感,故宣德紅釉器把釉層增厚 (約爲永樂釉層的兩倍) ,其光澤度減弱,溫潤感也就隨之而生了......説明萬曆以及清初三窰的祭紅器都是按宣德鮮紅器的模式而生產的」(《景德鎮珠山出土永樂宣德官窰瓷器展覽》,香港藝術館,香港,1989年,頁79)。 北京故宮博物院研究員耿寶昌先生指出,比起永樂的「鮮紅」,宣德紅釉品質更高。他列出這種釉色的一系列稱呼,包括「寶石紅」、「積紅」、「霽紅」、「醉紅」、「大紅」、「雞血紅」、「牛血紅」及「祭紅」(《明清瓷器鑑定》,香港,1993年,頁64)。 自洪武朝起,祭器皆用瓷。原因可能是金屬無法如陶瓷般造出各種顏色,這種對顏色的追求可能反過來促進了釉色的研發。祭紅器顧名思義,乃作祭祀之用,沿襲朝日壇用紅的傳統。不過劉新園強調,宣德朝並未嚴格區分祭器與酒食器(《景德鎮出土明宣德官窰瓷器》,鴻禧美術館,臺北,1998年,頁160-161)。洪武帝曾言「事死如事生,事亡如事存」,語出《禮記?中庸》,言下之意即祭祖禮器可用於日常(施靜菲撰文,〈The New Idea of Ritual Vessels in the Early Ming Dynasty: A Third System?〉,柯律格、霍吉淑及陸於平合編,《Ming China. Courts and Contacts, 1400-1450》,倫敦,2017年,頁113)。朝日壇以紅釉瓷作祭器的記載僅見於嘉靖及以後。本品為宣德朝製,或曾作禮器供奉於祭壇,又或見於筵席之間。 臺北國立故宮博物院至少藏有兩件與本品形制、大小均相近的宣德銅紅釉盌,其中一件被劃分為茶鐘。乾隆帝對此十分喜愛,特別選配新石器時代栗黃有領璧作為茶托,璧上刻有乾隆三十四年御製詩,參考《也可以清心:茶器、茶事、茶畫》,國立故宮博物院,臺北,2002年,編號42及https://theme.npm.edu.tw/opendata/DigitImageSets.aspx?sNo=04015434(圖2)。 永樂年間的工匠已嘗試燒造與本品形制及大小相近的紅釉盌,卻不曾成功。慾知其困難之處,可見一永樂朝末期無款殘品,展於香港藝術館,1989年,前述出處,編號31(圖3)。另有一永樂朝斑駁紅釉殘品,載於《明清御窰瓷器:故宮博物院與景德鎮陶瓷考古新成果》,北京,2016年,編號108。 直至宣德年間,才出現帶款紅釉器。本品以青花書宣德年款,殊為珍貴。參考少量與本品形制及大小相近的宣德紅釉器,年款皆模糊不清。其中兩盌藏於臺北國立故宮博物院,載於《故宮瓷器錄》,臺北,頁44,並載於國立故宮博物院出版之《明宣德瓷器特展》目錄,臺北,1980年,編號91(圖4),以及《明代宣德官窰菁華特展圖錄》,臺北,1998年,編號119,其中后一盌為上文提及的有領璧茶托茶鐘。另有兩件尺寸相近的宣德年款紅釉盌,曾被中國送往英國《中國藝術國際展覽會》展出,皇家藝術學院,倫敦,1935至1936年,編號1618及1620,並載於展覽相關刊物《參加倫敦中國藝術國際展覽會出品圖說》,上海,1936年,卷2,編號140及141,二盌目前下落未明。 傳世銅紅釉作例皆精美非凡,反映工匠對品質嚴格掌控。見一景德鎮珠山明官窰遺址出土的宣德年款紅釉殘盌,形制及大小與本品相近,略為變形,展於《景德鎮出土明宣德官窰瓷器》,鴻禧美術館,臺北,1998年,編號113-4,另有兩件釉色不均的紅釉大盌,分別署劃款及青花款,編號113-2及113-3。珠山遺址瓷片堆還出土一件斑駁淺紅釉殘盌,外形類似本品,書宣德年款,內壁留白,載於《景德鎮出土明代御窰瓷器》,前述出處,頁110,編號048。 由於燒造艱難,進貢宮廷的正色銅紅佳器寥寥可數,故宣德以降,幾近棄絕,至康熙一朝方告復甦。康熙帝下令燒造已失傳的銅紅釉器,成品確實發色濃艷,然相比明初者,仍稍為遜色。耿寶昌先生解釋(出處同上,頁64),宣德銅紅釉器的口沿白邊因釉藥自然垂流形成,康熙時則在沿邊施一圈白釉燒成。 《雍正十二美人圖》中〈桐蔭品茗〉一幀可見仕女右手輕持紅釉盃,斑駁釉色暗示此乃康熙年間所造。仕女身旁擱一隻茶壺,因此手中瓷盃顯然用來品茗,載於《China. The Three Emperors 1662-1795》,皇家藝術學院,倫敦,2005年,編號173,頁258右下角。 繪於雍正六年的《古玩圖》為大維德爵士舊藏,現存於倫敦大英博物館,手卷內畫滿雍正帝御藏古玩,其中可見與本品形制相仿的明初紅釉盌。對比鄰近紅釉盤尺寸,此盌大小應與本品相差不遠。此盌連木刻盌托,代表當時應在宮中展示,見前述出處,編號168,頁252(圖5)。 銅紅釉器麗色矜貴,一器難求,燒造工藝極為隱秘,坊間眾說紛紜,例如在釉藥中加入紅寶石(柯玫瑰及武德,前述出處,頁565),或相傳工匠女兒隕身窰火,以鮮血染紅瓷器,為銅紅釉增添了一抹神秘色彩。

本场其它拍品

  • 竞价阶梯
  • 快递物流
  • 拍卖规则
  • 支付方式
竞价区间 加价幅度
0
10
100
50
500
100
1,000
200
2,000
250
5,000
500
10,000
1,000
20,000
2,000
50,000
5,000
100,000
10,000
+

价格信息

拍品估价:400,000 - 600,000 美元 起拍价格:400,000 美元  买家佣金:
落槌价 佣金比率
0 - 1,000,000 25.00% + VAT
1,000,000 - 4,500,000 20.00% + VAT
4,500,000 - 以上 13.90% + VAT
服务费:平台服务费为成交总金额(含佣金)的3%

拍卖公司

Sotheby's
地址: 1334 York Avenue
邮编: 10021
向卖家提问

小贴士

1. 一般拍卖公司接受的付款方式有以下几种:
现金、信用卡、转账汇款、银行支票、个人支票以及PayPal支付。
使用PayPal支付时,请留意需要在账单金额的基础上额外加上 4% 的手续费。
2. 信用卡的种类有以下几种:
3. 转账汇款时请注意银行手续费
海外拍企会要求足额到账,所以请您在汇款时,选择足额到账,或在汇款金额的基础上加上汇款手续费(如25美金)。
4. 国际转账汇款时, 您需要知道海外拍卖行以下汇款信息:
* 收款人名称
* 收款人地址
* 收款人银行账号
* 收款银行国际编码(8位字母数字组合,必填项, 如: BFKKAT2K)
* 收款银行清算码(9位数字组合,选填项)
* 收款银行名称
* 收款银行地址
5. 运输相关事项
有的海外拍卖行会替您安排和协调运输, 您只需要支付相关的运费及保险费(如您需要)即可;有的海外拍卖行会推荐几家长期合作的运输公司, 这些运输公司有着良好的信誉和高质量的工作效率,您大可放心。您只需要提供您的收货地址, 竞得拍品账单。 运输公司会根据您提供的信息给您报价, 您可以在其中选择最优的报价者来承担运输任务。然后就是付款了, 信用卡是最常用的支付手段, 当然还有其他像PayPal,转账等。
6. 进口通关可能出现的关税
国际运送的包裹在进口清关过程中如需支付关税,需由包裹接受人(即买家)自行承担。 征收标准:具体征收标准和额度以海关通知和解释为准。
7. 禁拍拍品
海外拍卖会可能会出现中国法律禁止交易的物品,如枪支、管制刀具、象牙、犀角等;中国买家不得通过本平台参与上述物品的拍卖活动;任何情形下,买家均须对自己的竞拍行为独立承担责任。
服务热线:400-608-1178
查看全部小贴士